Is it time for the GOP to reconsider its position on tax increases?

posted at 11:45 am on April 4, 2012 by Morgen Richmond

For all practical purposes the general election campaign officially kicked off yesterday with the Romney sweep, and the President’s speech on the Ryan budget. This is likely to be the defining debate of the 2012 campaign, and the President is clearly looking to cement the image of the GOP as the party of the 1% as early as possible. Guy Benson deserves a medal for having the fortitude to respond point-by-point to the President’s remarks, which were incredibly dishonest even for him. (My temple was throbbing after reading only half-way through Obama’s speech).

But at the risk of being banished after Ed returns from vacation, I think there is one key issue where the GOP is making a tactical mistake in conceding ground to the President, and that is the insistence on ruling out any tax increases as part of a comprehensive budget reform deal. Now before you write me off as just another RINO, I’ll hold up my track record as a conservative activist against anyone. And as a successful business owner in California, I deal first-hand with the challenges of one of the nation’s most onerous tax and regulatory regimes.

But I am mystified why the GOP has adopted such a hard line when it comes to tax policy, particularly within the framework of a budget deal which would include a major re-structuring of federal entitlement programs. I get the arguments. That a pro-growth approach of lowering rates, and eliminating deductions and loopholes, would actually be the most effective means of generating revenue in the long run, by expanding the tax base. I can also appreciate that from a political perspective it makes sense to stake out an initial bargaining position as far to the right as can be reasonably defended. And the Ryan plan is reasonable, by any fair assessment, considering the enormity of the fiscal imbalances it seeks to redress.

But regardless of how effective or reasonable the plan may be, it won’t make one iota of difference without a Republican president in place to enact it. And this is the mistake I think the GOP is poised to make, in handing the President a weapon he will use over and over again between now and November. To distract the public from the seriousness of the problem, and from the fact that he has no credible plan to deal with it. That the GOP is planning yet another giveaway to the 1%, at the expense of the poor, the elderly, and the sick.

Yes, this is class warfare, yes this is partisan demagoguery…and let’s face it, there is a better than even chance that it’s going to work. Which I find particularly frustrating, because given what may be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to finally deal with entitlements, personally, as a member of the near-1%, I would at least grudgingly accept a moderate tax increase knowing that we’ve set the nation on a sustainable path. Further, I would gladly – enthusiastically! – support the possibility of a moderate tax increase as part of the 2012 GOP budget platform, as long as it’s clear that this would only be on the table as part of a comprehensive deal which included entitlement reform, along the lines proposed by Ryan. To not only eliminate this issue as a diversion, but also to expose the fact that the President has no credible plan for sustaining the entitlement programs short of massive, across the board tax increases.

I’m not suggesting we scrap the Ryan tax reforms, just that we consider adding a little revenue from higher wage earners, or least a placeholder to do so. Just something to allow our nominee to credibly argue that when it comes to restoring the fiscal prosperity of our nation, everything is on the table. Because frankly, it should be.

Apostasy, I know. So go ahead and let me have it in the comments, but at least consider the merits of the argument. Are we really willing to jeopardize our future freedom and prosperity over the principle that we will never, ever under any circumstances accept a tax increase? This seems like folly to me, and I shudder to think what the fiscal outlook will look like if the status quo continues for another four years.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Technically, you are correct. Taxes should be on the table. However, the problem is that Democrats cannot control themselves. If you give them any opening for increased taxes, they will raise taxes on everyone, will continue to spend like drunk sailors, and then say Republicans agreed to it too, so we are not at fault.

To begin with, the 200k agrugment is a joke. There are many new law graduates, or MBA graduates, or MD’s in places like NYC, Chicago, Boston, LA, etc.. who make 200k and are not living like high rollers because of the cost of apartments, food, etc… When you factor in student loans, fees, etc.., it is only in Obama’s dreams that those people can afford to pay more per month in taxes. I know that this point is hard to believe, and that is why Obama uses 200k (because most people cant even fathom earning that much and those that can do not feel sorry for those earning 200k), but that is just a fact. And forcing someone making 200k to pay an extra 5% is an extra 10,000, which in the grand scheme of things is no small chunk of change when someone is already paying around 70,000 in federal taxes and probably another 30,000 in state and local taxes.

But, forget the 200k people if you want. If you let Democrats tax 200k earners, that will include many small business people. That 10k has to come from somewhere. And if there is additional revenue, Democrats will not cut anything but will demand more spending, because lets be real, there is always another single mother who had 10 kids she could not afford, or a family living off 25k that needs to be supported by the government. So, before you know, Democrats will tell us that those making 50-200k need to get a tax bump too. Because they need to pay their fair share.

So, while tax increases should not be off the table, when you give an inch on taxes to progressives, it becomes a slippery slope.

What the author is getting at is the concept of a meme. The meme of class warfare is a winning one for the Democrats as the GOP seems unable to counter it is a way that truly leads to the public “getting it”. So therefore, give in, put in the tax increases, get the reform, and then be Machiavellian and pull it later. If it takes this to get Obama out of office, so be it. If anyone read Machiavelli they would understand the scenario I am outlining. You can stick to your ideology and principles long term. Sometimes a short term head fake will get you what you want. Then when things are humming along, pull it back and demonstrate how by doing so you actually made no difference or made improvements to the situation in question. Of course, the caveat here is whether we can trust the GOP to do anything right and right now I don’t feel they have our backs. So once the tax increase is in place, it will be up to us to put the screws to them to ensure it is removed. Everyone with half a brain knows that if you tax the top 1% at 100% you still won’t put a dent in the federal deficit. For some reason, the GOP can’t get this message out. So tax them a bit more, remove the 99% vs. the 1% meme from Obama’s arsenal, and that is one less line of BS he can use.

As much as I don’t want taxes increased in any way… unless we have a GOP president, a GOP-controlled House and a filibuster-proof GOP Senate, Democrats are gonna fight stuff like this tooth and nail. So I hope we’re prepared for continued gridlock, a government shutdown and possible debt default as long as the other side can throw even the tiniest wrench into the system.

Now, please tell us how the Democrats would use these additional taxes . . . then try again to justify your previous argument. This is blatantly simple, if you give them more they will spend more. And yes. we’re wiling to sacrifice whatever is necessary to avoid the financial destruction of this once great nation.

Ah yes. So here’s the deal; you work hard, you be innovative, you come up with great and new products — and guess what, you get to carry the load for yourself and everyone else because you can afford it.

Reward the lazy moocher, punish the productive.

northdallasthirty on April 4, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Wow, talk about putting words in my mouth. Calm down. Read what I wrote again. Breathe.

I stated 2 facts:

1. US companies don’t pay the highest tax rate in the world since US tax law allows deductions up the ass. Therefore the assertion that the US has the highest corp tax rate in the world, while technically accurate, is not really true in reality.

2. The vast majority of people pay little to no income tax. The only people that pay any significant amount of federal income tax are very high income earners, which I would define as $150K and higher.

With Obama or Romney, taxes are going up – WAY UP – in the next few years. There’s no way around it. This is why I have been saying there is 0 difference between the two. Obama will raise taxes because he’s a socialist. Romney will raise taxes because he wants to be Mr. Compromise Bipartisan Go Along To Get Along.

Hell no because when we get to the next crisis, they will ask us again for all Americans to make a “sacrifice” and pay more in taxes. An then again and again and again. It stops now. Spending is the problem.

The answer: None of them. Instead, fat cats, millionaires, and unelected welfare bureaucrats who can afford their own food, parties, and flights lived it up, while the poor, elderly, and disabled starved.

That proves what a liar and a mooch you are, DBear. You don’t care about the poor, elderly, or disabled; you took the money that was supposed to help them and wasted it on yourself.

You are a liar and a mooch. Your party is a bunch of criminals, thugs and thieves who loot the Treasury and then demand the rest of us make up what they stole.

Now run away, you pathetic little coward. You don’t have the guts to answer this.

tyketto on April 4, 2012 at 12:16
Vashta.Nerada on April 4, 2012 at 12:17 PM

the poster stated 50% of people don’t payANY taxes. Which is why i said it was a myth. people pay taxes and when they hear the gop saying they don’t pay taxes they think the gop is out of touch or clueless.

I’m willing to consider tax increases when Congress and the executive (whomever that might be) show by their actions they are serious about spending cuts and entitlement and tax reform. When I see us moving towards a leaner, smaller, less bloated, saner federal government, I will be perfectly happy to discuss temporary tax measures to pay down debt.

Dumbest idea in the world. Raising tax rates reduces revenue because people hide their money in shelters that become more affordable as tax rates go up. Illinois, England, New York, and others have all recently tried increasing tax rates – and in EVERY case the revenue collected went DOWN.
Cut tax rates across the board and the economy will skyrocket and tax revenues will go up – because more people will be making money and paying more taxes.
But the basic problem always has been that government is SPENDING too much. That has to be fixed first.
And as long as the Dems have any control we will never solve any of this because they are against the policies that will actually solve the problem.

he poster stated 50% of people don’t pay
ANY taxes. Which is why i said it was a myth. people pay taxes and when they hear the gop saying they don’t pay taxes they think the gop is out of touch or clueless.

unseen on April 4, 2012 at 3:01 PM

come on, you know they mean federal income taxes….and it is true, 50% of the US population don’t pay federal income taxes….can you refudiate this?? nobody said that they don’t pay other taxes (state sales taxes, state income tax, etc)…

1. US companies don’t pay the highest tax rate in the world since US tax law allows deductions up the ass. Therefore the assertion that the US has the highest corp tax rate in the world, while technically accurate, is not really true in reality.
angryed on April 4, 2012 at 2:30 PM

I disagree with your assertion on technical grounds. We do have the highest corporate income tax rate in the world – that is an indisputable fact. How much actual money US companies pay is a different data point. US companies may pay less overall actual money to taxes than you might expect on the surface just from the corporate income tax rate, but that doesn’t mean they pay a lower rate.
There are many ways companies pay lower taxes (not a lower rate per se), just like individuals do – through allowable deductions, in some cases subsidies, and by moving money to or claiming the money came from overseas divisions. If your company operates all over the world, there is nothing wrong or illegal with making sure you don’t pay US taxes on money made in another country. So semantically speaking, your statement that “US companies don’t pay the highest tax rate” is not accurate. It all boils down to what is or isn’t valid taxable US income.

Someone needs to work up the taxes on an average family, most of which have two wage earners since one can’t put the roof over their heads and buy food and gas. Also, most above average incomes are a result of a life-time of work for those taxpayers. Work hard for 50 years and you’re bound to make more than minimum wage.

And if you live in a state like Maryland? When the feds and the state get finished with you, you’re going to be bringing home less than an 18 year old on minimum wage.

Everyone talks about the 200 to 250 thousand a year crowd, but does ANYONE remember that the Bush tax cuts raised tax BRACKETS. And since those were implemented, we’re now facing massive inflation (the people who think refrigerators determine the cost of living need to try eating one and driving to work in one). Wages have not increased with the unreported inflation that is VERY real. Just how is putting several more million on food stamps and in poverty going to help anything?

If we can get the economy growing and that includes more than Iphones, revenues will increase. If government takes away all discretionary income and keeps printing money, we’ll be a big version of Cuba. Oh, and the black markets and off the record work and sales will thrive.

Confiscatory taxation will do exactly what no taxation will do: reduce revenue and crash the economy. The Laffer curve is absolutely legitimate.

Not that I’m supporting libtard Dbear in any way – I agree with what you’re saying. BUT – somebody (most likely Dem cronies) made some good money selling the government all that booze, gourmet food, catering, party room rental, vehicle fuel, etc, etc. The problem is before that money was spent on those things, it was filtered through the bloated government bureaucracy, so that means far more was originally confiscated from us taxpayers. And my guess is a lot of the money spent on all that extravagance ended up back in Dem campaign funds – which is how the cronies got the contracts for that work in the first place.

But I am mystified why the GOP has adopted such a hard line when it comes to tax policy, particularly within the framework of a budget deal which would include a major re-structuring of federal entitlement programs.
POSTED AT 11:45 AM ON APRIL 4, 2012 BY MORGEN RICHMOND

Mystified?
Oh come on. Surely you’ve contributed plenty to the ‘no taxes evah!’ fever. GOP’s Frankenstein monster. And they rouse up the mob and hand out pitchforks.
John Boehner’s legacy will be that of a do nothing whiner, when he coulda been somethin’…

come on, you know they mean federal income taxes….and it is true, 50% of the US population don’t pay federal income taxes….can you refudiate this?? nobody said that they don’t pay other taxes (state sales taxes, state income tax, etc)…

jimver on April 4, 2012 at 3:16 PM

I wouldn’t refute or repudiate that as a fact – but I will say that statement does not apply to everyone in the lower income brackets. I just did my 2 sons’ tax returns:
#1 son is a 21 year old college student, still claimed as my dependent, made about $6000 last year, and had an actual federal income tax bill of $26 (as well as everything that was taken for ssn and medicare/medicaid).
#2 son is a 19 year old HS grad working full time, no longer a student, no longer lives at home, and was not claimed as my dependent this year, made about $13K last year, and paid an actual tax bill of about $130 (plus the other crap) – and does not get any kind of welfare, food stamps, medicaid, subsidized housing or any other handouts.
Both single, no kids, and neither is eligible for earned income tax credit and neither has dedeuctions like mortgage interest.
So while I don’t doubt that a lot of people – maybe even half the population – pay no income taxes, it is NOT just a matter of them being on the low end of the income scale.

A false and b.s. stat.
Learn yourself what income taxes are, and how they fit into the overall tax revenue.

verbaluce on April 4, 2012 at 3:36 PM

Medicare and social security are not taxes, they are premiums for old age and disability coverage. Use fees are also not taxes, how do I know this, ask any Romney supporter. The rest of the “taxes” they pay are usually paid for from other tax dollars they were given and in the end no where near pays for the services they receive. Thanks for playing.

The GOP already did reconsider their position on tax increases. They’re all for them. We’ve had a dramatic increase in inflation, under Bush, not to mention Obama. Inflation is a sneaky tax. Too much money has been spent since 2003 for taxes not to have been raised in some way. And it is the inflation that’s crippled the economy, increasing unemployment and created the so-called financial crisis in banking and housing markets. Romney isn’t going to improve the picture.

But I am mystified why the GOP has adopted such a hard line when it comes to tax policy, particularly within the framework of a budget deal which would include a major re-structuring of federal entitlement programs.
POSTED AT 11:45 AM ON APRIL 4, 2012 BY MORGEN RICHMOND

Mystified?
Oh come on. Surely you’ve contributed plenty to the ‘no taxes evah!’ fever. GOP’s Frankenstein monster. And they rouse up the mob and hand out pitchforks.
John Boehner’s legacy will be that of a do nothing whiner, when he coulda been somethin’…

verbaluce on April 4, 2012 at 3:42 PM

The problem is that there is no trust – none whatsoever for democrats who played a grand bargain on both Reagan and Bush and reniged each time when it came to actual spending cuts – and very little for republicans, who also do not have a stellar record for actually cutting spending.

the fear – and it is a reasonable fear – is that we’ll be sold tax increases with alleged cuts and reforms, but that we’ll get the tax increases and never see the cuts or reforms.

This is much like immigration. I doubt very much that a vast majority of conservatives are against the idea of providing a path to legality for some illegals at some point. But until we see real evidence of securing the border, slowing down the influx of illegals, and enforcing the law against the illegals already here and employers hiring illegals, the idea of any kind of amnesty just will not fly. Again, this goes back to the grand bargain Reagan struck with democrats where there was supposed to be immigration reform after amnesty to slow the influx. the amnesty happened, the reform never did.

so, show us some real entitlement reform, some real spending cuts and some tax reform. then we can have a reasonable conversation about tax increases. Otherwise, we know any tax increase will simply go to more crazy spending and won’t solve any problems.

“Hey, we’re right – but we’re getting our asses kicked on the issue so let’s compromise a bit here to get this whole thing off the table and get to the important stuff.”

So the GOP establishment will CAVE IN when it comes to tax increases … and the result will be …

1. The GOP grassroots will be EVEN MORE “uninspired” to get off their ass and vote for the GOP in November and …

2. It won’t get the issue off the table because the Dimmocrits will simply portray the GOP’s willingness to compromise as “token” and “insignificant”. They’ll ridicule and mock the very compromise effort that the GOP thinks will save them.

And … what’s going to happen in the end is … they’ll be clubbed to death for even attempting to compromise – but they’ll SHACKLED to the compromise. They won’t get a bit of political yardage out of the compromise (in fact, they’ll lose points with the GOP base) – and meanwhile, at some point next session they’ll be asked to swallow tax increases and they’ll damn sure do it because …

They’ve already agreed to.

GOP ELITES NEVER LEARN.

DO … NOT … EVER … GIVE … AN … INCH

Did the Dims give an inch on Planned Parenthood funding? Nope. PBS funding? Nope – they don’t give an inch … not a fraction of an inch. DIMMOCRITS ARE STUPID – BUT THEY GOT BALLS.

The worse mistake that Ronald Reagan ever made was trust the devil, Tip O’Neill. The promise was one dollar increase in taxes for three dollars in spending cuts. Just like all democrats O’Neill lied right through his teeth and Reagan got screwed. Never again! Cut the damn spending, we are all taxed enough thank you!

See: deficit reduction act of 1984. Our problem is over-spending and that can not be cured with more money. You could be right on the politics of it, but I don’t care – there are things important enough to stick your flag in the ground and defend and throwing more money at a lack of spending discipline is throwing fuel on the fire. It’s one thing if the government spends magic money that it didn’t have to take from someone first. It’s another thing when we abet the taking. There will eventually be a reckoning if we continue to hold the line on taxes. If we don’t – the reckoning will be postponed and far worse. We can not control whether the Dems overspend, it appears. But we can control whether we help them and make the problem worse. Tell Ed to end his vacation early.

Oh come on. Surely you’ve contributed plenty to the ‘no taxes evah!’ fever. GOP’s Frankenstein monster. And they rouse up the mob and hand out pitchforks.
John Boehner’s legacy will be that of a do nothing whiner, when he coulda been somethin’…

Abolish federal income and corporate taxes and do the FAIR Tax already.

I don’t get why we keep dancing around and around on this tax issue with the Dems. I also don’t understand why the TEA Party hasn’t been more active in pushing for the fair tax, and supporting candidates who will?

Obviously, the bureaucrats and the politicians of BOTH major parties have no intention of doing away with the IRS. They would lose the ability they have to nose around our bank accounts, impose liens, seize our property and wealth for the slightest of “debts” to the government, threaten us with fines/jail, sic their lawyers on us and so on.

It’s all about controlling us, and we’re too busy attacking the Dems and letting our various Conservative “darlings” do pretty much nothing as long as their sound bites are appealing.

I think it’s been said a couple times already, the Democrats will raise the taxes and still spend like drunken sailors.

My question is why do Republicans have to be so congenitally stupid ALL the time to believe anything they say? Just like all the pap about Republicans should “compromise” – until the Democrats get in power and refuse to compromise.

This budget deficit and debt isn’t going to fix itself and soon enough, there isn’t going to be any options. Sovereign default is either-or. There’s no “just a little bit bankrupt”.

It’s a fallacy to say that the government needs higher tax rates. What they “need” are more tax revenues. We already have the highest corporate taxes on earth. Raising tax rates will NOT increase tax revenues because we are on the other side of the Laugher curve.

If you want to increase tax revenues from where we are, you need to DECREASE the tax rates to encourage more economic activity. This increased activity more than compensates for the lower rates. This has been true every time it has been tried, just take a look at the STATES who have done this recently. IT ACTUALLY WORKS… unlike the emotional appeal that you have fallen for.

It is attittudes like yours, Mr. Richmond, that remind me why I am no longer a Republican. Neither the GOP let alone the Dems give a damn about cutting spending;both are happy with Socialism as long as they get re-elected. It is long past time for conservatives to create their own party INDEPENDENT of the GOP and Dems.

1. We have a Spending Problem not a Tax Problem.
2. Frankly, many in the GOP embrace tax hikes already, it is not apostasy…i.e. 9-9-9 or a Perry flat. Either would technically be a tax increase for the 47% who pay no taxes…I don’t know many in the GOP who would oppose a broadening of the tax base in that regard, if only to implant an inherent distrust of Federal taxation in 47% of the electorate.
3. If, God forbid, the GOP were to propose a credible tax hike it would apply to Union Dues only, which would be frozen and capped by Federal Law and taxed at a rate of 99%…With payment to the US Treasury coming directly from the union workers’ paycheck at the time the check is cut. That sounds about right to me.

I also find your position rather surprising particularly given your stated residency and business interests in California. I have lived in California since 1972 and have sadly witnessed the self destructive nature of the state by the Democratic led government there. And one critical element of that has been the steady “incremental” tax increases you recommend here.

The issue you seem to have lost sight of is effectively examined and summed up by William Voegeli in his book: “Never Enough: America’s Limitless Welfare State”.

His point in the book, as can be gathered from the title, is that for liberals and progressives there is never a point where a limit has been reached. So if Republicans were to yield ANY tax increase, it would never satisfy the Dems and it would never be enough. Additionally, it removes the principle of no more taxes and reduces it to just a matter of how much is enough. Don’t kid yourself, the demagoguery would continue and Republicans would not even have the basis of principle to stand on.

Remember, Reagan and H.W. Bush also went down the path of accepting tax rate increases as a “reasonable” alternative only to see spending grow ever faster.

You still see Dems using the old tired line of how Reagan signed the “largest tax increase in history” line when needed.

I would also remind you that you make the classic mistake of getting caught in the incorrect argument of raising tax RATES versus raising tax REVENUE. Higher tax REVENUES come from greater economic activity with the same RATES in place. That is the argument that should be vigorously made. And one need only look at the percentage of tax burden paid by “the rich” and how it has climbed even in the face of lowered rates to see this is empirically true and proven.

In 2011 Illinois increased corporate tax rates by 46% and individual tax rates by 67% to solve their deficit – the result – unemployment went from 8.7% to 10%, companies started leaving the state, people started leaving the state, and the Dem legislature spent MORE money instead of cutting spending, resulting in unfunded liabilities growing from $2 Billion to $7 Billion. While Illinois may have seen a brief initial increase in revenues, that is already dropping off because of the loss of companies and jobs, and they didn’t solve their deficit because they just spent more.

UK increased their top income tax rate to 50% and got 1/3 LESS revenue as a result. So in only 1 year they have already gone back and reduced the top rate back down to 45%.

Plain and simple and proven – increasing tax rates on the wealth and job producers does not bring in more revenue, in fact it does just the opposite.
But none of that matters if we don’t control the SPENDING!!!!

So how do those who are creationists harm you? On the other hand your party is the party of the ultra young earther’s where you believe that the climate started less than 300 years ago with the instrumental record of temperatures. After all you all keep parroting that the 90′s were the hottest decade on record. Your parties belief will set us back to the stone age burning wood and dung to cook and stay warm. I’d say you are far worse then any creationist however misguided they might be.

Reagan accepted a tax increase, which he later rued, for the promise of spending cuts. It has been nearly 30 years and no spending cuts. So I’ll tell you what give me 30 years of spending cuts and I’ll entertain a tax increase. The problem with the whole d*mn argument is we can’t control what future Congresses do. We raise taxes with the changes to the entitlement structure and in 10-12 years congress changes them back. We just saw that happen with this administration. In reality the only solution is a repeal of the income tax amendment and a new amendment that establishes a just tax rate that can’t be changed by congress to do social engineering.

As someone who is closer to the other end of the “income divide”, I have to strongly disagree with the premise that we have to “tax tax tax the rich”. We’ve been doing just (only, really) that the last several decades through a highly-progressive tax system, and that is the reason why when we hit the Great Recession, federal tax revenues fell far more sharply than private income.

capital gains.
there – i’ve said it.
if mittens came out with a tag line of I’m willing to raise taxes on capital gains for those 1% for every dollar that comes off of the federal bureaucracy for poop science or snail darter research then it becomes – to the uneducated masses “hmmm….the richest 1% will be taxed if we don’t pay for the scientist on the federal payroll.” ok, the gop finally got its head out of its rear end. NOT SAYIN’ that a) any of it will pass congress b) base line budgeting will ever get a grip on reality and c) its just a way to get the stupid people to stop thinking we’re always the bad guys.

Are we really willing to jeopardize our future freedom and prosperity over the principle that we will never, ever under any circumstances accept a tax increase

?

I could leave this at how so many are ready to jeopardize our country by selecting a tax increasing liberal to run as THE GOP candidate, thus assuring more liberal leadership of America, but that is too easy.

Instead, let’s consider if we have a candidate with the backbone to tell Americans that the Democrat spending spree MUST be paid for just as all Americans pay their bills every month, and of how it was William Clinton that told the truth when he raised taxes on ALL Americans in order to have enough money to pay for Hillarycare. Due to Hillcare falling flat on its face [as RonMecare is doing today] America ended up with its first balanced budget in many decades, so we know what it will take to keep America solvent.

you mean raising taxes on the poor, elderly and disabled. and who says the party of creationists is unchristian and darwinian?

DBear on April 4, 2012 at 2:39 PM

You can all it that. I fit into at least one of those categories myself.

The elderly do not need any special tax treatment, they have had entire lives to build up their net worth and raise families to help support them if they become infirm and incapable of working for a living. Having an arbitrary best if used by date on a human being does not seem to be working out for any country it is practiced in.

The poor remain poor when they are subsidized for earning less. They refuse to earn more because once they hit certain thresholds they lose their free money, and it is a sin to not take free money to those people. It become generational. So giving them special benefit for no other reason than they made less money than other people seems to be a POOR help. The tax breaks we give to poor today are shackles on their potential. Here again, everywhere it is practiced to have take from the producers and give to the moochers show decline. It just does not work.

The disabled are rarely ever totally disabled, particularly from birth. There are things like disability insurance, family, friends, the community and other charitable organizations to take care of them. They do not need special tax breaks to survive. But many disabled can work well enough, if not in jobs they day dream about doing. I sure as hell never got to be the astronaut I wanted to become, 100% because of my height and eyesight, should everyone be paying me for my lack of having a dream job?

Ideally, each and every single man woman and child should pay the exact same amount of money to fund the government, regardless of how wealthy they are or how much money they earn in some arbitrary period of time. The next best situation is that people just simply pay the same damned share based on their consumption and living standard they chose to enjoy within the boundaries of the government that they chose. We currently have the single worst kind of tax system, where the rich actually make direct payments to the poor for no other reason than many people, like yourself, refuse to be generous with you money and give charitably!

I think there is one key issue where the GOP is making a tactical mistake in conceding ground to the President, and that is the insistence on ruling out any tax increases as part of a comprehensive budget reform deal.

Republicans raising taxes, becoming the tax collectors for the Democrats accomplish exactly one thing, they enable the next round of irresponsible Democrat spending. That is it, the debt or deficit never goes down it’s just full speed ahead for more Democrat spending.

I think most conservatives would be willing to consider a tax increase, especially if it helped with our national debt, rather than the deficit. Except for one thing, or more accurately, one thing exemplified by a bunch of little things. $16 continental breakfasts. $800k triple visits to Las Vegas, and a whole host of other spending missteps that our federal government takes. They have proven that they can not be responsible with money. Hell, if it wasn’t for the fact that I’d go to jail, I’d withhold my TAXES from them, sending along a note that until the federal government can demonstrate their ability to balance a budget, stop writing hot checks, and their own EMPLOYEES can pay their OWN taxes, I’ll withhold mine.

It doesn’t matter. The Democrats will say the same things they always say no matter what the Republicans do. If the Republicans compromise on tax increases, it won’t be enough. The Democrats will demand more, and more, and more, and when the Republicans finally say no, they will be accused of favoring the rich and hating the poor. Since Republicans are going to face the accusation anyway, it’s much better to be able to defend themselves from it by standing on principle and doing what’s right.

you mean raising taxes on the poor, elderly and disabled. and who says the party of creationists is unchristian and darwinian?

DBear on April 4, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Yeah, a novel idea. You make a little, you pay a little. You make a lot, you pay a lot. Elderly and disabled are excluded, only a paycheck. Flat tax works and works GREAT! “Fair share” taken care of… All the idiots who demand it should make an effort to understand what it actually means.

Mystified?
Oh come on. Surely you’ve contributed plenty to the ‘no taxes evah!’ fever. GOP’s Frankenstein monster. And they rouse up the mob and hand out pitchforks.
John Boehner’s legacy will be that of a do nothing whiner, when he coulda been somethin’…

verbaluce on April 4, 2012 at 3:42 PM

This is a lie. You want to give us some examples of GOP mobs? The Tea Party perhaps? No mob. Not one arrest. Not even any garbage because we pick up after ourselves.

You want mobs? There was one just yesterday. Students who wanted free stuff, like their tuition (and food and housing, I’m sure).